[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[1:50] Thank you.
[1:52] Thank you.
[1:52] Have you finished down there?
[1:55] I'm sorry.
[1:55] I'm sorry.
[1:56] I'm sorry.
[1:56] I'm going to have an introduction from my right.
[2:01] Diane Ralden?
[2:03] Nick Nuclecent?
[2:05] Dave Russell?
[2:06] Got call.
[2:07] There we go on.
[2:10] One call at it?
[2:13] Vice chair.
[2:16] Having said that.
[2:17] Law is not here, so we can nominate her for everything.
[2:25] Folks, we need a nomination from the floor to fill some positions.
[2:34] We have a voting forum?
[2:35] Yes sir.
[2:36] We do.
[2:37] Then Mr. Chairman.
[2:42] Paul, I was going to go ahead.
[2:44] You do it, you first.
[2:46] Okay.
[2:47] Whatever.
[2:48] Mr. Chairman.
[2:49] Yes, please like be recognized for person of the nomination
[2:52] So be it. I'm not made commissioner doves his vice chair to step up to chairman
[2:57] Second thing
[3:02] all in favor any opposed
[3:05] We need a nomination for the floor for vice chair, please well seeing is that she has she isn't here
[3:14] You've worked for her she's been right home. Yeah, you can't look at the way
[3:20] you'll be inspired on those rules you can't be
[3:22] you can't be a vice chair
[3:24] because by all means they can't serve you to share so it doesn't make sense of vice chair
[3:27] that's why it's the same way yes sir
[3:30] well she could attend meetings when the chair don't feel like going right as the vice chair
[3:34] no no she can't run the meeting okay
[3:37] all right I'll make a nomination
[3:39] please
[3:39] um... nicknicalson for vice chair
[3:42] though a motion and a second for commissioner nicknicalson to hold the role as
[3:47] I share the MPO all in favor.
[3:50] So be it.
[3:51] Thank you, then.
[3:55] Let the record show there.
[3:58] The mayor has arrived.
[3:59] You are just a elected chairman.
[4:04] We tried.
[4:04] They wouldn't allow us.
[4:06] We tried, but they said it wouldn't legal.
[4:09] I said since when does that deter us?
[4:12] Looking for a approval or modification to the gender folks?
[4:17] Some who.
[4:19] I have a motion back to Mr. Rodden.
[4:21] I'll second.
[4:21] Second, my commissioner.
[4:23] Nicholson, all in favor.
[4:24] Aye.
[4:25] I've said that.
[4:26] We also need an approval for the minutes.
[4:29] To move.
[4:31] We have a motion back to Mr. Nicholson.
[4:33] Yes, sir.
[4:34] We still have other appointments to make with regard to the MPO.
[4:40] We just to care of the officers at the MPO.
[4:43] The less than afforded MPO chairs coordinating committee.
[4:47] They offer or being chairs, coordinating committee, nominally the chair of the MPO attends that meeting, the CCC meetings, and they're quarterly.
[4:57] However, we also appoint an alternate, presently, the alternate is Larry Bradburn of the city.
[5:06] So we need the primary representative, if you nominally as I said, is the chair or a dozen new of the chair.
[5:13] One statement I wanted to share with you, I attended the last CCC meeting on your behalf, and
[5:21] They're looking forward to appointment from that committee to also be an appointment to T-Barda
[5:26] I know that we have one representative on T-Barda and then another local on T-Barda
[5:31] It may not matter in your discussions, but I just wanted you all to be aware of that. They're looking for someone
[5:37] Who sits on the CCC board to also serve on T-Barda
[5:43] Yes.
[5:44] Do we need to go through these?
[5:46] I mean there's five of them.
[5:47] Do we need to go through one by one?
[5:48] Yes.
[5:49] Except for the last one with regard to the T-bar, that was appointed under the Board of
[5:55] County Commissioners, because the appointment is to the county, not to the MPO individually,
[6:00] and then there's the governor.
[6:01] Turn it out.
[6:02] I'm going to mention the Russell.
[6:03] Okay.
[6:04] Well, we did the hearing of the county, MPO, right, just stormed we got done with.
[6:07] Yes, sir.
[6:07] And now we're on the CCC.
[6:08] So Mr. Chairman, I'd move the domination for you as Chairman to be the CCC member, which is a Chairman's commission.
[6:24] Which makes sense.
[6:25] Patrick, we should agree. We should leave it as the Chairman.
[6:29] Mr. Representative.
[6:30] That's the second to the move.
[6:31] Second.
[6:32] Okay, so all the favour?
[6:34] Aye.
[6:35] And then I will also move to do it all on it be Laura again, I guess that's okay to do that.
[6:43] On the favor?
[6:44] All right.
[6:45] We get the motion there from Mr. Russell and second by Mr.
[6:49] No, it's the other way around, wasn't it?
[6:51] Mr. Nicholson, do you make that motion?
[6:53] Okay.
[6:56] And then the 40 MPO if I made Mr. Chairman, I would keep Laura as representative for the city of Brooksville
[7:03] On the 40 MPO, the vice-console?
[7:07] Yes.
[7:08] Second.
[7:09] I have a motion by Commissioner Nicholson to say
[7:11] about Commissioner Russell, all in favor.
[7:13] Hi.
[7:14] Are you opposed?
[7:16] Okay, I need the alternate for that position.
[7:19] I would, I'd nominate Diane for the alternate.
[7:21] I was going to do Nick.
[7:25] Okay.
[7:26] Okay.
[7:26] I'm doing Nick.
[7:28] Okay.
[7:29] I'll withdraw my motion.
[7:30] Second it.
[7:33] So what is the motion motion would be for Nick Nicholson as by myself second by commissioner
[7:40] So on a favor
[7:46] What's next in the transportation disadvantage I'll make motion per wing to be
[7:52] Actually, I would
[7:55] You want to do that?
[7:56] Okay, I'll with Ron and I'll nominate Dave
[7:59] Oh, okay
[8:01] So he's already been a so. Okay. So I'm sorry? I'm ready for this side. He's already been a sign. I'm sorry. I'm sorry I don't wish around. I'm sorry alright.
[8:11] Yes.
[8:13] All the favor. Hi.
[8:18] I want you to take it from here since I screwed that one up Dave.
[8:22] I'm a combination for commissioner Russell for the tea bard.
[8:28] Hey, well actually he's already been appointed button under the county.
[8:31] or you need the ultimate well then we need an alternate wind dukes
[8:35] actually let's have already assigned me to that
[8:41] why are you even else
[8:44] so someone who want to nominate me
[8:50] they're all signed
[8:53] oh why are we having fun yet focused on first
[8:57] i forgot i'm sorry we need a vote done with yes we do
[9:00] We have a motion on floor folks all the favor. I
[9:05] I forgot about all of his appointments
[9:13] Are we okay now, Dennis? Yes, or thank you
[9:20] There's not a second thanks chair
[9:23] No
[9:23] I left
[9:33] my agenda upstairs, so I'm trying to scroll down on this thing to find out. I can't really read off my
[9:38] computer screen. Oh, thank you, sir.
[9:46] Oh my goodness.
[9:50] Okay.
[9:58] So now we're back to the approval of minutes. I'll
[10:01] mean to I'll request a move. I have a motion by Commissioner Nicholson and a second by the Mr. Russell to approve the
[10:09] minutes on favor. Is there any comment about correspondence and note?
[10:19] We have two resolutions. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Thank you.
[10:25] Chair. In your package is two resolutions, our two resolutions. The first of which is a resolution
[10:32] supporting advancement for the design and construction of the Sumpas Parkway 2 in
[10:36] Sifters County. Turmpac Enterprise is completed 60% of the design plans for this project
[10:43] and they programmed over $25 million for advanced right-of-way acquisition. The Hernando County
[10:51] MPO would lend its support to the Citrus County Board of County Commissioners to make this a high priority project and this resolution is being put forward to support that project.
[11:03] There's a resolution, including no low spots in the road allowed.
[11:07] I'm sure they'll address that. Yes sir.
[11:10] They'll make sure it's not on the floodplain.
[11:14] What do you need for a motion or a consensus?
[11:17] We need a motion.
[11:17] Okay. I mean, said that folks we need a motion for this support of this resolution.
[11:23] Assembly.
[11:24] I'll sign up.
[11:24] We have a motion back to Mr. Raoul and second back to Mr. Nick.
[11:28] Support the resolution for Suncoast and Citrus County.
[11:32] All in favor.
[11:34] Thank you.
[11:35] Thanks, sir.
[11:36] The next resolution is for the, again, supporting the advancement for design and construction of the SR50 corridor in the adjacent high 75.
[11:45] have. This area has been approved for development by the counties. At the last board
[11:52] Nina believe several adjacent landowners came to this board requesting the DOT advanced
[11:58] design and construction if it was at all possible. The attached resolution supports that
[12:05] laying out the reasons why we feel this should be advanced. An SIS facility, it will help
[12:14] support the economic growth to the area of the 7th and 7th.
[12:19] Steve did that also include the area east of 75 was as part of this project.
[12:24] Two Sherman Hills Boulevard Desert.
[12:26] Now there was a lot of questions and concerns about that.
[12:29] Will we at some point get some sort of feedback on the concerns of the board at that time?
[12:33] About where it was going to end and what somebody asked to take it off father and
[12:37] say we're asking for catering, extending all the way to catering.
[12:40] And there was questions too about taking away the light and having people get trying to get back across the road to get back on 75.
[12:48] All right, but we get feedback when those things are resolved or whatever what they intend to do if anything.
[12:54] The specific area around the interchange, the operational issues that will come back to the Info in February or March.
[13:00] This is more for GEOC's programmatic encouragement of the multi-laying of the sections east of the I-75 to catering and catering to McEathen McEathen to 301 and eventually all the way to the term party.
[13:14] Thank you.
[13:16] Ms. Van.
[13:16] Lee Royal Department of Transportation.
[13:19] We'd be happy to provide that feedback to you.
[13:22] We're actually looking at all the concerns expressed at the last MPO meeting and we'll be happy to bring that back to you.
[13:29] I had quite a few questions to ask about, you know, the possibility of congestion and or the traffic would not like there.
[13:37] So I would really appreciate that.
[13:38] No problem. Be happy too.
[13:41] Yes sir.
[13:41] Yes ma'am.
[13:43] And thank you for bringing that.
[13:44] That was my question in regards to this.
[13:46] I thought that this doesn't have lights.
[13:48] Oh, he doesn't have.
[13:50] Is that on? Is that better?
[13:52] Yes ma'am.
[13:53] Thank you very much.
[13:55] I thought based on our comments and conversations at the last meeting
[13:58] that that would actually be part of the resolution process so that we could strengthen a unified
[14:04] call for that. Is that not my understanding or is that our collective understanding?
[14:12] Well we went back and played the meeting back on the video tape and we wrote it the way that we
[14:18] understood it. What I had mentioned in the last meeting was that we have a study underway the
[14:23] PODs with our consultant, analyzing the circulation in the area, DOT is already well-advanced
[14:30] design for the interstate and the interchange area itself.
[14:33] So this isn't a future project, this is something that is a little different than these
[14:37] others bringing them into the program.
[14:40] What we're discussing in the immediate interchange areas are already underway.
[14:45] So little differences, and when our consultant comes up with their findings on how we're
[14:50] to what we need to do with our front-of-the-road system and signalization.
[14:55] That's coming in February of March.
[14:57] That work was already underway within one of the things that we had to...
[15:00] August also was that, because it was already underway, that to enter its center, then later, would actually save money long-term to taxpayers, but also ensure that that smooth transition exists now, rather than later, which costs us more and causes more headaches for traffic.
[15:16] I thought that was part of our conversation. Am I mistaken on that?
[15:21] Dennis, excuse me, Mr. Bradburn, if you look at the resolution, the resolution does include
[15:28] advancing design and construction from east of I-75 to catering, which would include the
[15:35] Sherman Hills Boulevard intersection. So it is included in the resolution, I think, that we
[15:41] tried to reflect the discussion that we had at the last meeting. And we will be giving you a presentation
[15:47] from our consultant relative to the frontage road system, the traffic lights, congestion and traffic
[15:53] in that area, and we will coordinate that with DOT, those findings as well.
[15:56] So I think that's kind of what I was thinking.
[16:00] If I made Mr. Chairman,
[16:03] because Dave pointed out, you don't have lights over there.
[16:07] It's a wave.
[16:10] Dennis Aron, whoever, a newspaper,
[16:14] he had an article on there about us being a favor of this,
[16:19] and now the developer is not going to have to pay anything.
[16:22] Those impact fees are the developers agreement.
[16:25] It's still in place.
[16:25] I mean, we're not doing away with the developers agreement.
[16:29] Can you answer that?
[16:31] I'll try to give you a general answer without having the agreement in front of me.
[16:34] But my recollection of that particular agreement is that the developer receives impact fee credits for construction.
[16:42] So if there's no construction, then the developer would have to pay impact fees.
[16:47] And there are other improvements that are associated with that particular development order.
[16:51] We're not doing the way with that.
[16:55] No, correct.
[16:56] And what's happening, I think, given the market,
[17:00] that project has really slowed down.
[17:04] So I think we anticipated a much hotter market,
[17:07] and that project would move forward,
[17:09] but we still need to have this project done.
[17:11] And the state is cooperating with us to get this project done.
[17:14] If we wait on the development, we may be waiting.
[17:16] Why do you want us to clear that, as a commission,
[17:20] we're not giving this money away. We're going to still get the money one way or another.
[17:25] If they don't get impact fee credits, they don't have to pay the impact fees.
[17:30] That's correct. That's correct.
[17:33] Wait a minute, if you don't have impact fees, how are they going to be paying an impact
[17:37] fees? Well, we have the commissioner, we have not resolved that
[17:41] question. That's an ongoing discussion.
[17:45] We're going to go around with this.
[17:50] Are we good over there now, guys?
[17:51] Yeah.
[17:54] So we need a motion for that resolution, folks.
[17:57] This is a for the resolution supporting advancement of design
[17:59] and construction of the 50 quarter adjacent to 70.
[18:03] I move motion by Commissioner Nicholson.
[18:06] Second by Commissioner Russell, all in favor.
[18:09] Hi.
[18:11] Thank you.
[18:12] The gestion management process.
[18:15] Who's doing that?
[18:15] Actually, I think we're going to do MPO portion at next item G.
[18:19] You're right.
[18:20] Thank you.
[18:20] How that I'm trying to run through this or anything.
[18:23] This is going to be a multiple presentation effort.
[18:27] Firstly, Royal will give us the background of the MPO portion at process.
[18:38] I think this is still there.
[18:40] Every year, I'll just get some background.
[18:42] Every 10 years, after the decennial census, the urban areas are updated,
[18:47] and the MPOs are re-apportioned according to those urban areas,
[18:51] which they're supposed to serve, it's a little more interesting this time than in the last two times
[18:56] with the advent of the urbanized area in Citrus County.
[19:06] Mr. Chairman, how we would like to handle this is that Ms. Royale will give you a presentation
[19:11] on the apportionment process and then after that presentation we'd like to have a discussion
[19:17] with you regarding the new urbanized area in Citrus County and how that could potentially
[19:22] impact us and how you would like us to proceed with that.
[19:26] And Mr. Cofford is here, and I'm sure he'll want to comment when we have that discussion
[19:31] as well.
[19:32] Thank you.
[19:32] Thank you.
[19:33] Hello.
[19:34] Again, my name is Lee Royale with the Florida Department of Transportation.
[19:39] And we, I'm here to talk about the reapportionment plan and designation of MPOs.
[19:47] This gives you an overview of what the census area looks like in the district, which includes
[19:55] citrus, Hernando Pasco, Penelas, and Hillsborough.
[19:59] 2010, you can see it's grown and it actually had a name change to spring hill, but you
[20:08] can see how the population has grown in the county in the urbanized area.
[20:17] In citrus, it's a very new urbanized area. They're growing, and this was, and you can
[20:28] see they have opportunities to grow north and they have an opportunity to grow
[20:34] to south.
[20:38] You can see how it's changed over the years. The blue, you can see the
[20:43] variety of how they're urbanized.
[20:50] I just want to go over what this means.
[20:54] Every 10 years with the census, the MPOs are identified through the census urbanized areas.
[21:02] You are typically notified and asked to develop an apportionment plan that shows the makeup of your voting membership and your board.
[21:12] And how it's going to represent the planning area and for this area, I think you have a lot of opportunities forthcoming.
[21:31] Typically,
[21:34] the Apportionment Plan is an agreed to plan between the individuals representing
[21:41] 75% of the affected governing population, along with any transportation authorities that
[21:50] may be serving on the board.
[21:52] Your Apportionment Plan goes up to the Governor's Office, and it's a mutual approval process,
[21:58] And then it comes back and you're within the designation and you're then approved and you start executing the appropriate agreements and whatnot.
[22:09] We're in the first step and that's in your apportionment plan.
[22:21] Just to go over some of the requirements of your governing board, it doesn't include elected officials,
[22:28] transportation providers, authorities, and it can include anywhere from 15 to 19 members.
[22:38] Again, the Governor will review the composition of your board to ensure that it is meeting state law.
[22:49] May I believe you misspoke, you could 15 to 19, you mean 5 to 19?
[22:53] Yes, I mean 5 to 19.
[22:55] Thank you.
[22:57] Big difference on that.
[23:04] Things that we've been in discussions with staff and with citrus transportation planning
[23:12] organization is looking at a regional MPO here that can fight combining citrus and
[23:21] hernando's urbanized planning areas.
[23:25] We believe that there's a lot of possibilities in planning and moving projects forward
[23:36] regionally.
[23:38] I think with limited resources that we're seeing, I think it would be an opportunity
[23:43] to combine your resources and powers to move projects forward and plan forward.
[23:53] And looking at the northern area, just within your recent actions on this agenda of voting for resolution towards the Norasund Coast,
[24:04] I think this board would have a lot of influence as a regional board.
[24:11] We're just starting the consultation process.
[24:14] I'll be meeting with both citrus and hernando staffs going through the process and talking about the re-apportionment.
[24:24] I believe this will be coming back to the board for their action and an ultimate for apportionment approvals.
[24:34] But it is a consultation process and we start with staff in our work our way up through
[24:41] workshop with board members.
[24:45] So there will be more to come.
[24:48] We're looking for the Apportion Plan to be developed by March, April, timeframe, and I believe
[24:59] we'll have a series of workshops with staff and the elected official boards to develop that.
[25:08] And I believe we have an additional speaker, our friend Bob Clepper.
[25:17] Mr. Chairman before before Bob speak, come on Bob up to the podium. Thank you.
[25:21] I think what Ms. Royale was saying is that you as an MPO decide that a regional MPO is a good idea
[25:30] And you direct us to move forward.
[25:32] We would have to develop an apportionment plan.
[25:35] We would bring that apportionment plan back to you for a series of discussions with you.
[25:40] Should you agree with the apportionment plan, then all the local governments that are affected by it would have to individually
[25:46] at their own elected board meetings, adopt resolution supporting the apportionment plan,
[25:52] and then we submit it to the state or the governor's office for approval.
[25:56] Ron, would it be, would it be advantageous, very one of our next upcoming workshops set aside some time on that to discuss this and maybe staff could prepare not a big deal,
[26:07] but it's kind of give us the heads up, because we've got one commissioner not here and what that would entail and stuff.
[26:12] We could maybe take a half an hour, 45 minutes out of one of the workshops to talk about that.
[26:16] we could do that. However, you know, this is really an MPO process and I think what we'd
[26:24] like to do is have some, unless you direct us to do something different, we'd like to have
[26:29] some discussions with, with Citrus County, with the district and then bring something back to
[26:34] this board that would reflect how that apportionment would work. I'd be glad to update the Board of
[26:39] County Commissioners if you want me to at a workshop. The only thing I see differences, these
[26:43] meeting to take place at the end of the full day. Whereas in a workshop, it would be fresh.
[26:50] You know, we could even set aside a special workshop for it so that we could do it with clear minds.
[26:56] I mean, whatever the consensus is, but I look forward to hearing for more about this.
[27:01] Okay. We can work something into, you know, into your workshop schedule.
[27:05] Mr. Chairman?
[27:07] Mr. Chairman?
[27:08] Mr. Chairman?
[27:09] No, I'm not sure.
[27:09] I know this, but obviously I don't intend commission workshops.
[27:13] If you could ask me if we invited you right.
[27:16] If my schedule allows.
[27:18] However,
[27:21] the, you know, particularly as a member of MoPAC representing this foreign
[27:25] in the county, there's been a lot of discussion over the years.
[27:29] And I think it's part of the discussion process.
[27:31] We really need to talk about the role of MPOs and where the state sees that going and you know
[27:40] I know Commissioner Russell has had much discussion on this as well and you know
[27:45] Particularly if you're going to be joining with other regions
[27:48] Where is the duplication? Where is that lie? What is the benefits of
[27:54] an MPO if we're forced to go to a regional approach as far as as opposed to
[27:59] simply a local approach, and what is the role of no-pack since the governor already appoints a separate transportation board.
[28:08] And I think all of those things really need to enter into the discussion.
[28:13] We're sort of a small fish and a big pond menu in that statewide discussion,
[28:20] but I think it needs to start somewhere, and if we're going to be discussing it particularly
[28:24] And in the vein of consolidation, perhaps those issues need to be discussed as well.
[28:31] Actually, I agree with you 100%.
[28:32] Now, having said that, Ron, taking into consideration what Mayor said, there's no reason
[28:39] why we couldn't have a workshop as MPO, is there?
[28:45] Absolutely, you can do that.
[28:47] We give it our full attention if staff chance to put something together after you talk to the other counties and if you have any questions
[28:55] For many of the members please feed those in the staff so they can brief us on them. I think it's a good idea
[29:00] So we'll even your hands wrong. Thank you. Thank you
[29:05] Yes, sir. Welcome. Thank you Bob Clifford
[29:09] I'm in the second director of Tvarta, but I'm actually here in a different role today
[29:12] I'm here
[29:14] representing citrus county. We actually provide
[29:18] management services, if you will, two citrus, about a year ago, they created a transportation
[29:23] planning organization, kind of a precursor to their anticipated ability to meet the census
[29:31] requirements to be designated as an MPO. That was every decade, this occurs. There were
[29:37] now, at that point in time, where they have met the requirement from a federal perspective
[29:42] to be represented by a full MPO. So I'm here in that role before you. One of the things
[29:49] that we've been talking about as part of this is it is a process. You've heard it from
[29:54] Ms. Royale, you've heard it from Mr. Pianta that there is a process to go through this
[30:00] This is certainly new to citrus, who's very interested in the dialogue and the conversation
[30:06] understanding how this moves forward. They've heard very loud and clear from FDOT, that they
[30:14] really look at it from the perspective of joining and existing MPO as opposed to creating a new
[30:19] MPO. We reached out, talked with staffs of the three adjacent MPOs. In this case, Marion County,
[30:28] the Lake Sumter, MPO, and Hernando, for many reasons, I think the biggest one is the fact
[30:35] that citrus views themselves as part of the Tampa Bay region and views themselves most closely
[30:41] with Hernando County as opposed to Marianne or Lake and Sumter counties. And as part of that
[30:49] process, they've given me the ability to come speak with you all. You've got our request that
[30:56] The first part of the process is to identify to the governor, who is ultimately, who we
[31:03] have to all go to, to identify to him that we would like to enter into into that conversation,
[31:09] formally enter into that conversation with Hernando, and see if we were not able to come
[31:16] to a place in time that makes sense to work together, to come up with a plan as Mr. Pianta
[31:22] indicated in the enforcement plan as they call it, to be able to go through that and to move
[31:28] forward ultimately. We see it from the issue of resources, both local resources and federal and
[31:35] state resources and real abilities there, kind of going to Ms. Brad Burns position or
[31:42] point about kind of a small fish issue. We can citrus a slightly smaller than hernando,
[31:48] kind of the same position, thinking that there might be that ability to collectively speak
[31:53] with a larger voice, particularly when we look at the issue of transportation resources
[31:59] and funding and having that opportunity and ability.
[32:03] So from our perspective, speaking for Citrus, we're excited.
[32:07] We'd like to begin that process with Hernando, would like you all to consider that and if you're
[32:14] obliged to to enter into that discussion process, as Ms. Royale mentioned, that we
[32:20] go ahead and start doing that and notify the governor that we would then start working
[32:23] through to see if we can't come up with a plan.
[32:26] And if that was the chair of any questions you have a meter of, if you're something more
[32:30] than happy to answer before.
[32:31] Well, in my opinion, being in a novice compared to some of the experience, we would be
[32:36] a miss if we didn't entertain discussions on how to make a process better, and then we can
[32:41] degree or disagree based on how smart we are at the end.
[32:45] So anybody would like to jump in, raise your hand, and if you want to press on or something
[32:50] to give this young man some depth direction, let's staff, rather?
[32:55] Mr. Chairman, whoever the best answer to the question I said between five, I guess five
[32:59] and fifteen members, that would be decided as we go along the line and who the members would
[33:05] be and they'd be a portion of based on population, I guess.
[33:08] So Hernando would, Hernando, books will combine what have more members than citrus.
[33:15] I mean, that's what I'm understanding is that the way I look at it.
[33:18] I was looking at 18 for us.
[33:22] But wouldn't we have more members than citrus?
[33:24] I would answer that, but that is a consultative process between citrus and Hernando.
[33:31] That's something the staff would come together, have those discussions and then bring it back before their boards.
[33:37] to say today, you know, one county is going to have this many votes in the other county.
[33:43] It's a little premature without having that consultation process and working through that.
[33:48] All right.
[33:49] If I may echo that, that's exactly correct.
[33:51] I mean, that is part of the apportionment process.
[33:54] And because Ms. Royal points out it's a consultation between the DFT, the state and the urban areas
[34:00] and we would work through that and bring those kind of options back to you for discussion.
[34:04] I think really all we're looking for direction to proceed.
[34:08] Correct.
[34:09] I think we're talking about.
[34:10] And then we have to find a place to meet for 15 people if we can.
[34:15] Oh, you're getting ahead of yourself, we've had these conversations and we really need
[34:21] to take this one step at a time, little incremental bite so we know where we're going, what
[34:27] it means and how it's going to work and it involves discussion with another partner.
[34:31] now it involves another county we they're going to be our partner if that's the direction we move in and and so there's a lot to be talked about and work for
[34:39] all from all I've heard it's more advantages of disadvantages so well with we will know better as we get along this
[34:45] what you need from us or on as far as direction just consensus of motion what do you want to do well we we would like a motion that you would
[34:53] you know, authorize us to start the re-apportionment process with
[34:57] citrus county and then we're bringing something back to you and a workshop format.
[35:03] And I believe what Miss Royale was also asking for and they can interrupt me
[35:07] of five make a mistake please please do.
[35:10] But what they're also asking for is that we draft a letter for your signature
[35:15] Mr. Chairman due to Governor's office letting the governor know
[35:18] that that is the direction that we're going to be moving.
[35:21] We intend to move at this point. We're going to try to work through the
[35:25] apportionment process and see if that works out.
[35:28] So you heard the required motion. We have a motion about Commissioner Russell.
[35:32] So you're about Commissioner Rodden, all in favor.
[35:35] Does that include the authorization for the chair to sign this letter?
[35:42] What do you said?
[35:45] So all in favor again?
[35:47] Are you opposed?
[35:49] Thank you.
[35:49] Thank you. Thank you.
[35:52] It should be interesting.
[35:54] I don't know.
[35:57] Say that with a smile on your face.
[36:04] Next item is age-condition management process.
[36:08] Mr. William Rold from our consultant to all of our associates.
[36:12] We'll give a brief presentation on how our congestion is going.
[36:16] I just use knife.
[36:17] I'm sorry excuse me.
[36:18] I just use knife wheel.
[36:21] You know, many of us have probably benefit from that right now.
[36:25] Good afternoon.
[36:25] My name is William Rawl.
[36:26] I'm the Director of Baltimore Transportation Planning,
[36:28] for attend all of our necessities in Tampa.
[36:32] I'd like to review with you the 2012 update to your
[36:36] congestion management process.
[36:39] And first, I'd like to start off a little bit of background
[36:42] in terms of what is the congestion management process.
[36:44] It's a management system and process that is an
[36:49] it's focused on transportation operations and safety. Oftentimes we look at a wide range of strategies,
[36:57] including strategies that can reduce travel demand, but also particularly in the case of
[37:02] your accounting looking for things that affect operational improvements. Typically CMT type projects
[37:09] are low cost, relatively low cost improvements compared to widening or major capital expansion
[37:17] of roadways, and as some of you will recall from your last long range transportation
[37:21] plan update, the board actually provided guidance to the staff to focus on
[37:27] taking the limited resources we have spent on the intersection and improvements,
[37:30] and maybe pull back on some of the capacity expansions based on where we were from
[37:34] the financial standpoint.
[37:36] So I'd like to go and talk a little bit in terms of the interaction and the impact of that is the impact of the great fall.
[37:45] Only about 2% of the big motivated rowing over here in the county.
[37:49] And I'd like to go through this key.
[37:51] That was the same at
[37:54] 2%.
[37:55] Very slow.
[37:57] One of the other things we track is crashes.
[38:00] And one of the things that we do see is that's a little bit troubling to us.
[38:03] When we take a look at the trim, a fairly significant increase in total crashes, reported
[38:12] in year 2011, when we go back and look at some of the details of all of those crashes
[38:17] are involving either vulnerable users, bicycle pedestrians, a motorcyclist, or where the
[38:22] report was indicated the aggressive driving, speeding, reckless driving was a potential cause.
[38:29] If you think about those aggressive driving behaviors, that's a behavior, it's not necessarily
[38:33] infrastructure or engineering related. But it is something that we need to be keeping an eye on.
[38:40] We're going to take a look at, if I can interrupt you, that's a little bit.
[38:43] We repeat that again. The majority of the accidents, the majority of the accidents were
[38:47] bicycles, pedestrians, and the majority of the we break up crashes in the four different categories.
[38:55] Okay, by safety and necessary, which is something comes down from the state in terms of guidance
[39:00] of looking at crashes, lane departure crashes, at intersection crashes, crashes involving
[39:06] aggressive driving, and crashes involving vulnerable users. When we compare those four
[39:11] subgroups of crashes, for each one of these individual years, the areas where we're seeing
[39:16] the increase, the increase in the crashes, are the aggressive driving and the vulnerable user
[39:23] crashes. That's where the increases.
[39:25] You know, they're quite, usually a vulnerable user crashes, that may have something to do with
[39:31] number of people we have on our road to or even as old as I am or older.
[39:37] Maybe that may be a physical condition too, but not being able to see as well.
[39:42] I want to tell you how many close calls I've had coming up here in the past year or so
[39:46] of the winter.
[39:47] There may be more truth than that statement that we've cared for than that.
[39:49] And it's probably going to increase with all of that construction on 50, trying to get into Starbucks' terrible.
[39:59] If I may add to that, I agree with what Wayne said about the population getting to it.
[40:08] I almost had somebody the other night on my local street, it's very poorly lighted.
[40:13] They had on black, black shirt, black pants.
[40:17] writing a bicycle with no lights, I couldn't see them, I mean I couldn't see them, not until
[40:25] after I got out into the street, scared me to death, would have been my fault, I don't
[40:32] know what, I mean I couldn't see them, so I don't know if we can educate the public, I mean
[40:37] that's against a lot or I'd a bicycle without lights on it but, and to be right around
[40:43] Right around the bottom of the bicycle with black clothes on and no lights, it's irresponsible.
[40:49] So I mean, yeah, we have some order of population, but I think in some cases, it's the problem is the individual.
[40:56] There's an old legal saying, you can't legislate stupidity.
[41:00] Honestly, I mean, this certain number of those is just nothing you can do about it.
[41:04] Are you going to do what are you going to do?
[41:05] You bring up a good point in terms of the bicyclists, writing a night without lights.
[41:09] I did the bicycle safety action plan for Hillsborough County on similar plans and other jurisdictions.
[41:15] About 60% of the 66% of the fatalities are evolving cyclists riding their bicycles at night without light fatalities.
[41:25] Those are the crashes, we did eliminate any crashes but the fatalities, we feel like we had a good day.
[41:31] One of the recommendations came out of that was that the community was actually going to fund light kits for the law enforcement and the law enforcement sees that they can correct.
[41:39] do some of the correct reaction, just stop in the cycle,
[41:42] and say, hey, don't do that again.
[41:43] It's not necessarily very effective.
[41:45] So that could be something that could be looked at in the future.
[41:48] We do look at those subset of crashes in terms of bicycles,
[41:53] some pedestrians, compared to other jurisdictions in the district.
[41:56] Your numbers aren't as high as others.
[41:59] And those other jurisdictions have made some conservative efforts.
[42:02] And that could be again something that could be considered in the future.
[42:06] I think it's interesting though, if you look at this new paving jobs we've had, I.E. County
[42:11] Line Road, they put a nice bicycle path on the side, but when you get to the intersection
[42:16] of 19, that bicycle path runs between the right lane and the turn lane, you're driving
[42:21] with cars on both sides of you, as you try to ride forward on your bicycle, I would call
[42:26] that no man's land.
[42:28] You're describing something that, as in the engineering side, had a very difficult time coming
[42:36] up with the best location, I should know, put that.
[42:40] The conclusion, the consensus that's been reached and it's actually our design standard
[42:44] is to do that placement and to very clearly communicate that yield point where the motors
[42:50] are supposed to yield to bicyclists, that being said, we do see some crashes involving
[42:57] that location but remarkably few. The design is actually better the what we're mitigating
[43:04] for is the vehicle that's making the right turn as the cycle is going through and historically
[43:08] that's been a very severe crash. I share your concern but it's the best treatment we've been able
[43:16] to come up with. We undertook a number of the valuation activities as part of the
[43:27] safety that actually go on and take a look at potential improvements.
[43:31] And we focused on a series of items, State Route 50, a mayor and a boulevard, some safety
[43:38] issues revolving, run off the road crashes and advanced signal warning is directed by the
[43:41] board.
[43:42] I'm taking a look at Explorer K through 12 school and it's impact on the work boulevard.
[43:48] And then lastly, there's discussion relative to State Route 50 and there's state 75.
[43:51] You've already heard a boulevard about that already this morning.
[43:55] And so, the start off with at St. R. 50 and Merner Boulevard, we actually did some operational
[44:03] analysis of that intersection, taking a look at the north leg of the intersection,
[44:07] some ways that the laneage could potentially be reconfigured, taking a look at alternatives
[44:13] that may include the requirements of purchase and a part right away to construct improvements
[44:18] generally the consensus that was reached by the staff and in the engineering staff was we
[44:25] need to not be short-sighted in this area. There's a lot of potential changes going on in terms
[44:29] of changes in a reconstruction of some of the commercial properties in the area and that this
[44:36] needs to have a broader, broader scope to not just look at the intersection, but look at all
[44:41] the way down to land over and look at the adjacent intersections to the east and the west
[44:48] So the recommendation that came out from the review is to do a more complete study of the
[44:53] access management of the interconnectivity of the front-age roads in that area and then
[44:59] how...
[45:00] Access can be provided to the businesses. We think that this is one of your major commercial activity nodes.
[45:08] And this needs to be more than just taking a look at intersection. He's about taking more comprehensive approach.
[45:13] So that was a recommendation of that location.
[45:19] If we're going to be looking at that, I think it might be beneficial to look at the potential of adding,
[45:25] We were talking about the bicyclists, greater access for bicyclists along that interchange.
[45:34] The thing is, if we look at where our fatality lies, we're having more and more bicyclists involved in accidents,
[45:45] not just at a local level, but statewide and what can we do to begin to decrease those numbers?
[45:51] as well. Adding the four-foot shoulders, if you just look at spring-like highway, for instance.
[45:58] It's not a bike lane, but it sure acts like a bike lane, having those four-foot shoulders,
[46:03] and it's really reduced road rage tremendously along that way.
[46:07] If you look at it in this intersection and apply that principle throughout,
[46:12] for more road planning standards throughout the county, but at this intersection,
[46:17] The economy is going to force us to be using bicycles more.
[46:23] That's just a bottom line.
[46:24] It's not getting any better anytime soon.
[46:27] More and more people are going to be riding bikes to and from work at those businesses.
[46:32] If we can begin to plan a way for them to cross more safely,
[46:37] I think that's just prudent in our part.
[46:40] You're going to see a long-term benefit for road safety.
[46:43] Not just from bicyclists but from a driver's perspective as well and I don't know if you can add that into the study
[46:49] If you're going to be looking at something else, but I think that would benefit us all, and then take the lessons that we learned from that intersection and apply it to
[46:57] Other intersections that we're going to be looking at
[47:00] I think I think that would be an appropriate recommendation. I have a question
[47:07] When we're talking about Highway 50 and Mariner, and if you go a little bit west, you've got
[47:13] high point boulevard there, and there's that funding road, still, there's no way for it to
[47:22] get from high point to the shopping areas, is that something that's, you don't mind on the north side
[47:29] or side of the north side, yes ma'am, that is one of the things that would be considered as part
[47:35] the study. If you think about it, there's potentially the signal at Mariner. There's a signal
[47:41] farther off to the west, and there's also the signal on it, believe it's a cult coastal
[47:47] there in front of the Walmart. If we were able to effectively input the north-and-south sides
[47:52] of the roadway, be able to connect those together, it would provide some opportunity to use the
[47:58] traffic. I think you do have some users of the roadway in that area that they didn't have to travel
[48:04] through Mariner and Fethy, that they might choose to go and know the route, that rallying
[48:09] would have to be clear, and they'd have to perceive it as being safer, and that would
[48:12] be part of the intent of the study as to be able to provide that level of level of circulation.
[48:17] Mr. Chairman, I think that something I've borne's already discussed that we would like
[48:21] to see those furniture was connected, and that the fees could be recouped at a later period
[48:27] of time, but that's something I feel very strong and that we need to proceed with.
[48:32] Well, I know we've been talking about high point along there for as long as I can ever remember.
[48:41] And you know, a lot of people have come and gone that we're hoping that it was going to come sooner.
[48:47] But I mean, it would help tremendously amount of people that would come out of high point that maybe just need to go up to the grocery store and back home without getting out on
[49:00] 50 up on Mariner and you know, again, it's been years, so probably going to be years more
[49:07] right.
[49:12] Any other questions at 50 in Mariner?
[49:17] The next series of locations run, Hexam Road, Maldon Hill Road, like Lindsay, as part
[49:23] of the screening process, there's an indication that there was a bit of an abnormal pattern
[49:29] to run off the road crashes, each of these locations had one or more fatalities occurring
[49:35] at the same location.
[49:37] Upon further review, it was concluded that there are already studies in the pipeline that
[49:44] the county engineering staff was undertaking to come up with resolutions of these issues.
[49:50] Some of these issues have been known for a little while.
[49:53] There are a lot of things like dealing with right away or dealing with clear zone in order
[49:57] be able to make an improvement, but what we can report is that mitigation, the issues that
[50:03] may be causing some of these run off the road crashes are in the pipeline to resolve
[50:10] the issue.
[50:10] We're talking about run off the road crashes because they are disproportionately a common source
[50:17] of the tally crashes, so that's the importance of these studies are in place for those.
[50:24] The next board asks does the take a look at potentially advanced signal warning at a number
[50:32] of locations and what I'm going to do is step through.
[50:35] The concept here is the similar to what you have on state-refifty east of Brooksville, the
[50:43] overhead advanced flashing signals going in place.
[50:46] Typically, that treatment is reserved for locations where a signal would be unexpected, where
[50:53] on the highway, you're going for several miles and then you come across a signal or there is
[50:58] a site distance from, there's a visibility problem in terms of detecting the signal.
[51:04] We have one of those at St. Rift 15, spring, like highway. This is one of the site
[51:09] distance from? Yes. Yes. And it also has a history of significant crashes that could be
[51:17] mitigated by that particular treatment. We reviewed the locations that were identified
[51:22] of the board meeting and I'll step the step through them.
[51:25] U.S. 41 at Powell Road, U.S. 41 at WestCon,
[51:29] U.S. 41 at State Road 50, and U.S. 41 at MLK,
[51:32] where the four locations.
[51:34] And what we saw is that there is a range of
[51:38] correctable crashes over three-year time period
[51:41] that range from one crash, seven crashes, nine crashes,
[51:47] and then that's a road 50, and U.S. 41,
[51:50] there's 28 crashes over your time period.
[51:54] Those are not high numbers, particularly as if we were late to 40 and 50, that actually
[52:02] would be on the lower side in terms of the number of correctable crashes that you would
[52:06] anticipate of that location.
[52:08] The recommendation and call this whole thing with the engineering staff and after reviewing
[52:12] the crash reports would be to place consistent with the department's policy as standards
[52:19] advanced warning signage that would identify at the next intersection, what that next
[52:26] intersection is, and I'm sure you've seen these signs on portions of 19 and such, and
[52:31] that would provide additional guidance to the public that there is a signal ahead, what
[52:37] that signal is particularly with our aging population. This is very helpful in helping them
[52:44] make decisions in terms of their approaching. And so the recommendation, the consensus
[52:48] that was reached would be the foot of this advanced warning signage in place.
[52:56] In our systems, you mentioned already have the signage required by state law and we're happy with that.
[53:06] Having said that, Benchers are great here. A lot of people go down to with the Gucci electric's
[53:13] place on 50 down towards 19 to pay their bills.
[53:17] And then it was also a neighborhood behind there, and there is a lot of impacts.
[53:23] People trying to come out of there and go straight across the four lane and turn left.
[53:28] Whereas if you turn right, there's a red light that you could do, you turn at within
[53:32] less than 100 yards.
[53:36] Do you ever look at, and if you go back into that neighborhood and go right, you can come
[53:41] way through to the red lights up on Sunshine Grove Road.
[53:48] There's ways we could reroute that without actually putting anything except maybe a sign
[53:52] to right turn only sign coming out of there and you know, or something like that, that it would
[53:57] not be a huge impact as far as funding if we could get the proofels.
[54:02] That could be a good candidate project for you.
[54:04] Simply update.
[54:05] Next cycle.
[54:06] Thank you.
[54:07] Okay.
[54:10] The next area where we took a look at was the Explore K through 8. Some of the traffic
[54:16] circulation and operations at that location. There's a number of issues that are occurring
[54:22] at this school. I probably summarized it up best by saying that when the school district
[54:31] changed their busing policy, it changed the way students got to school. I'm sure you all
[54:37] This is fairly large school, probably, I know I didn't go to, I never went to school that was as big as this school was, it is currently.
[54:47] And so what's occurring is the traffic during, particularly during the afternoon, is backing up on to Northlet Boulevard and causing some traffic operations issues.
[54:57] We took a look at, we went out, we didn't do it, the Exhausted Technical Study, but we do have
[55:02] experience and deal with school circulation, went and met with school district representatives,
[55:08] observed how it was operating, and we made some recommendations for them. This is largely
[55:13] something that's in their control, and some of the recommendations would be difficult to implement
[55:19] mid-year, there were kind of things that would need to be implemented, concurrent with a new school
[55:24] year and that way you're not confusing the parents, but we do believe that there's an opportunity
[55:30] at this location for them to address how they're doing some of their access.
[55:36] There are also some issues on the east side of the school in terms of how secondary
[55:42] access has been created and some of the impact on the neighborhood and dealing with parking
[55:47] and we understand that counting staff is going to be looking into that issue as well.
[55:52] So there's a number of recommendations and they've been provided to the principal, what is it?
[55:57] Suggested recommendation and you may not have thought about this, but what have they considered?
[56:05] Okay, you take that school where there's a lot of problems because of the kids that are not getting transportation.
[56:12] And if they said, okay in this school, maybe we can start providing the transportation again.
[56:18] And again, it would be cheaper in the long run than re-aligning a bunch of roads and whatever
[56:27] to kick in a few buses to get these kids transported.
[56:31] You know, actually discussing it with the school board personnel and the county traffic
[56:37] engineering.
[56:38] This isn't unique to the school.
[56:40] There's many of the schools that are having similar operational problems.
[56:44] There are some strategies in terms of how the parent pick-up and drop-off operation is being
[56:49] conducted that makes it potentially safer and quicker to process the vehicles.
[56:58] And so those are a long line of the recommendations we weren't looking at doing much
[57:02] of the way of significant realignment or adjustment.
[57:06] We were making recommendations that was changes in signage, so the signage is standard signage.
[57:13] But, at this time, we weren't making recommendations in terms of any kind of significant capital expenditure, it was mostly operational.
[57:25] But then the last location is doing additional study at state where 50 interstate 75 between catering and lock cart.
[57:32] This is somewhat concurrent with a discussion that are consistent with the discussion earlier during the meeting about the department's project,
[57:41] which has the potential of changing access to the properties in this area.
[57:46] We were talking about opportunities in terms of input infrastructure.
[57:50] But there's a lot of opportunities out there.
[57:52] And the sooner a comprehensive master plan for circulation is developed,
[57:59] I think the better position you're going to be in.
[58:01] That study is currently underway.
[58:03] I do not have any, I'm not the project manager on that project.
[58:06] So I can't, I can tell you that the initial data collections mean undertaken and some consultation
[58:12] of the land owners and as Dennis mentioned, there will be somebody coming to you at a future
[58:18] board meeting to present some recommendations.
[58:22] And so what we like, the board to do today, is to adopt the recommendations that is identified
[58:28] in a 2012 congestion management system process.
[58:31] And then there will be the MPO staff will work with us to finalize the report, and then also at a future date or the rise of staff to conduct that state where 50 at Mariner Boulevard Circulation Study.
[58:48] And then finally there will be a review of the location for the advanced signal signage that will be those four locations we've done finalizing that we need to be done on the part of her nanocallion of Florida Department of Transportation.
[58:59] So those would be the four key half-shimes, but for you today, I'm going to be the adoption of the recommendations I presented.
[59:05] With that, I'm going to be able for any additional questions in my hand.
[59:08] No questions. I'm looking for a motion to adopt.
[59:11] We have a motion back.
[59:13] I wish to round in a second by Commissioner Nicholson to adopt the recommendations of the Imperial Board on the favor.
[59:21] Thank you.
[59:22] Thank you. Have a good afternoon.
[59:23] Thank you, sir.
[59:26] And, like many of the MPO processes that are cyclical, the condition management process will bring forward again next year for update, hopefully with some new exciting improvements.
[59:39] Exciting, that's a pretty strong word, Dennis.
[59:41] Oh, for Plenary, yeah.
[59:43] It's all right.
[59:44] The planer is exciting, I'm not sure about the rest of the world.
[59:49] The item I we have to consult at work scope items for the board's consideration.
[59:55] The first is for the assistance of our consultant.
[1:00:00] To MPHF staff, to attend some of the regional meetings that are going on. We're getting kind of pulled in a lot of directions. It will help with the assistance of the regional modeling process that goes on at DOT, as well as assistance with a preparation for local meetings staff is in this will be at the direction of staff as needed. This item would sunset in at the end of the UPWP period of June 30, 2014.
[1:00:30] total amount of the scope is in $20,000.
[1:00:37] It's all PL, the money that's allocated to the
[1:00:40] MPO, there's no local dollars involved. Good question.
[1:00:49] It's not just for tenants, it's for their recommendations, it's for preparation of items
[1:00:55] for the meetings that would be of a technical nature that staff doesn't have the capability
[1:00:59] of quite frankly, there's a lot of stuff going on that it's more than Stephen I can attend
[1:01:05] and be participating in that now, right?
[1:01:08] We have a workshop that just concluded and this basically extends that. That's correct.
[1:01:16] Commissioner, if you recall, we did have an additional staff position and when that staff position,
[1:01:24] And when that person left, we made a conscious decision not to fill that position.
[1:01:30] And part of that decision was to solve out some additional work, especially coordination
[1:01:36] of some of these regional meetings with our consultant.
[1:01:39] That was the choice that we made.
[1:01:41] We had that conversation with the MPO that a year ago.
[1:01:45] Right.
[1:01:45] Is there a code that we have a contract with our former MPO employee?
[1:01:50] We do not.
[1:01:50] Now, that employee works for Debarda, and we did disclose that to you, I think that's what you're recalling.
[1:01:59] And I know that we had to resolve some conflict in the agreement and that sort of thing is our recall.
[1:02:05] I'm just, there's no employment agreement that we have with that employee.
[1:02:09] It just sounds a little pricey.
[1:02:12] Quite frankly, if we're absorbing that work now, and then now we're going to spend $20,000 simply because it's in the budget.
[1:02:18] It just sounds a little pricing, and that's my choice.
[1:02:21] We're not absorbing the work now, and we will only pay for the work that we authorize them to do whatever we issue a task order for.
[1:02:30] That's the, that's the up and limit correct.
[1:02:32] Correct.
[1:02:33] It's only an as needed basis example.
[1:02:35] Thursday I need to be in Orlando, and I need to be in Tampa at the same time.
[1:02:39] I cannot do both.
[1:02:41] I certainly understand your dilemma.
[1:02:42] My question is if we're already essentially absorbing the workload now.
[1:02:48] why would really need to spend $20,000.
[1:02:52] So, we're not.
[1:02:53] We're not.
[1:02:53] That's not joining in.
[1:02:55] As needed.
[1:02:56] And Dennis being the frugal person that he is, I know he won't waste the money.
[1:03:01] So, well, this has got to last for you here and a half.
[1:03:03] It's going to spread out over a long time, yeah.
[1:03:06] I'm Mr. Chairman.
[1:03:07] I mean, my understanding from Ron is that we, we've essentially eliminated a position.
[1:03:11] We didn't replace the person.
[1:03:12] So that's a huge savings on a yearly basis in 20,000.
[1:03:15] It's certainly much less than what they'd been making.
[1:03:17] So I'm going to say I'm making motion we go ahead and I prove it is request you want to make a second
[1:03:25] or you want to say something. No, I'll second it. Okay. So we have a motion back commissioner Nick
[1:03:29] wasson and a second back commissioner route into approve the consultant works for all in favor.
[1:03:35] Hi. Any opposed? Yes. So be it. The second item
[1:03:40] consultant works go for traffic counter date for 2013 again this is an annual thing that we do.
[1:03:46] We sample approximately 50 locations, which is about half the network each year, as much as we were able.
[1:03:54] This scope is the amount is exactly the same as last year for the same number of stations, as I said.
[1:04:02] How much is the amount?
[1:04:03] 20,000.
[1:04:04] I'm sorry.
[1:04:05] $22,630.
[1:04:07] $60.
[1:04:08] I'll give that in the record.
[1:04:09] And by side comment, years ago, when engineering staff used to perform this for us when they had the staff, they no longer have the staff, and so for the last several years we have our consultant, but we have to have this data for the modeling process for the crash analysis, the congestion management, it's the basis of what we do basically.
[1:04:32] And also for those that you don't know, it also benefits the local, the engineers and architects working with the county and private projects because they also utilize the same data, which you bring a lot of calls for that data.
[1:04:46] So it's a benefit not only to ourselves but to the entire.
[1:04:50] And we mean we can also assume that it's as needed basis.
[1:04:53] Well, no, this is a specific time-certain task.
[1:04:57] We're going to have the data, then complete with the task by June.
[1:05:00] Basically, we need them going out, laying down the tubes, and relaying them down when they get torn up.
[1:05:06] We need the data in the peak season of the year, so that when the roads are the most congested, what's really going on.
[1:05:12] Now, can you send these 50 stations or one percentage of the toll?
[1:05:15] A little less than half.
[1:05:17] Well, that's a matter.
[1:05:17] So every two years, we have an update.
[1:05:20] Well, we're, yes, a total update.
[1:05:23] That's correct. I'd move approval to do this again.
[1:05:27] Thank you.
[1:05:28] I have a motion by Commissioner Nicholson to say goodbye.
[1:05:31] Commissioner Roud and all the favor.
[1:05:32] Uh-huh.
[1:05:33] You post, so be it. Thank you.
[1:05:38] Last item?
[1:05:40] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[1:05:41] There's currently a vacancy on the MPO's bicycle pedestrian advisory committee for a public at large.
[1:05:47] Remember, this Michael Renter has submitted an application to fulfill that position.
[1:05:54] If you have a motion by their bad burn and a second-by-commissioner route and for the appointment of Michael Werner
[1:06:07] the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee, all in favor.
[1:06:13] If these folks ever come give us an idea of what they've advice?
[1:06:18] The bicycle pedestrian advisory committee?
[1:06:21] They make a presentation to the board.
[1:06:23] have a priority, let's say they submit to the MPO on an annual basis.
[1:06:27] Okay, I don't remember ever seeing them, so I may be else.
[1:06:30] That's their largest work product, if you will.
[1:06:32] You do see the work product, although not necessarily the phases.
[1:06:36] I like to see I die.
[1:06:40] Any citizens comments at this time?
[1:06:43] Thank you all for coming.
[1:06:45] You know, I've watched Anthony come up and help with the electronics.
[1:06:49] I really think we should get him a uniform.
[1:06:52] Maybe a cape. Maybe a cape.
[1:06:55] We're having a look. Come on down.
[1:06:57] Oh, welcome to giant.
[1:06:59] Mr. McMame Elmov.
[1:07:02] It will come here for the recording.
[1:07:04] They're supporting you.
[1:07:06] You just made.
[1:07:06] They said to make you runner.
[1:07:07] They used to be on the planning of Johnny Commissary.
[1:07:10] Yes, you go.
[1:07:10] That other day, your name was Michael.
[1:07:12] He said, it's making. It's a female.
[1:07:14] That's making.
[1:07:15] That's making.
[1:07:16] I got him, I KEL.
[1:07:18] And by the way, I must congratulate you. I think it's worth exploring the possibility
[1:07:26] of a joint MP, I think it's a good idea. And let's go ahead with it.
[1:07:34] I go into it with an open mind, thank you. Open mind. So there's no other comments.
[1:07:40] Do we have an agreement to adjourn?
[1:07:43] Yep, he was good. Thank you folks.